Purchase on Demand(pod) & Interlibrary Loan

1. Purchase on Demand(pod)& Interlibrary Loan

2. What does POD mean? • Patron-centered/driven acquisition, just-in-time acquisition, patron-initiated purchasing (PIP) or evidence based selection • Workflow and policies differ among libraries, but initial request comes through ILL • Little or no subject specialist/selector input or intervention • Some institutions authorize ILL units (rather than acquisitions) to make the purchase request • Item may be given to the user when it arrives and cataloged after it is returned to further expedite fulfillment • Supplement to traditional (just-in-case) collection development methods

3. POD Policies • Set budget for program • Determine workflow for ILL and Acquisitions • Selection criteria: *date of material *language *vendors *publishers (UP vs. vanity press) *type of material (recreational or textbooks) • Metrics: *circulation stats Gail Herrera & Judy Greenwood (2011) “Patron-Initiated Purchasing: Evaluating Criteria and Workflows” Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Electronic Reserve 21:1-2, 9-24.

4. Buying vs. Borrowing • Interlibrary loan is not intended as a substitute for collection development. • New titles should not be requested through ILL whenever possible • POD can save time of user and of library staff • It may be cheaper to purchase and catalog if material cannot be borrowed from a reciprocal borrowing institution and/or the lender requires return by expedited shipper • Much of the literature points to circulation stats that show POD materials circulate more than once

5. Buying vs. Borrowing • Kent Allen (1979) Use of Library Materials: The University of Pittsburg Study New York: Marcel Dekker Approximately 40% of new titles had not circulated 5 years after purchase • Richard L. Trueswell (1969) “Library Users: The 80/20 Rule” Wilson Library Bulletin 43/5, 458-46180% of use from 20% of collection

6. Buying vs. Borrowing • Buy when book is published in the current/previous year • Filling requests in the most timely manner possible is of the upmost importance to our users • Patron does not care how the material is obtained • POD program should be seamless and not require additional work for end user • According to the literature, many interdisciplinary titles are added to the collection through POD programs that are not normally obtained through traditional collection development policies

7. Buying vs. Borrowing • The goal of the Washington and Lee University Library’s POD program is to meet the immediate needs of our users while adding potential high-use titles to our collection • Collaboration between Public Services (ILL Unit) and Technical Services

8. The W&L POD program criteria: • current year imprint • price of item less than $100 (prior to shipping) • not already expected through our Approval Plan • ILL materials that are requested more than once (by same user or multiple users) or needed for an extended period of time • Very few or no holdings on a title in WorldCat

9. How it works @ W&L • ILL request submitted by user through ILLiad • ILL staff determines if request meets POD criteria • Request is routed from ILL to Acquisitions using email templates and routing rules set-up in ILLiad • Item is purchased, cataloged, and user is notified when item is available for check-out

13. Why It Works • Items may be purchased and next day delivery requested from vendor • Items are “rush” cataloged • It is possible for users to have item(s) in hand in shorter amount of time than average ILL transaction (for W&L, average ILL transaction is about 4-5 business days) • It does not guarantee use by one user (they may not come to pick-up the item) • In our experience, POD materials do get checked-out at least once and several have had multiple check-outs • User will have longer loan period than with ILL and can easily renew • Item will be available for future check-outs • Works well for DVDs (cheap to purchase and difficult to borrow through ILL)

14. Patron Feedback • Some of the literature discusses obtaining patron feedback through surveys • Suggestions for improvements, level of satisfactions, expectations/needs, etc. Uta Hussong-Christian & Kerri Goergen-Doll (2010) “We're Listening: Using Patron Feedback to Assess and Enhance Purchase on Demand” Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Electronic Reserve 20:5, 319-335.

15. Criticism • POD purchases may be made without patron consultation and patron only needs book for citation checking or bibliography chasing • Collection may end up with materials that have narrow focus • It is cost effective? Cost-per-use? ROI?See G. Van Dyk (2011) “Interlibrary loan purchase-on-demand: A misleading literature” Library Collections, Acquisitions, and Technical Services Volume 35: 2-3, 83-89

16. GIST: Getting it System ToolkitDeveloped by Milne Library at SUNY Geneseo • idsproject.org/tools/gist.aspx • Tool for integrating Acquisitions and ILL into one workflow and interface • From GIST website using ILLiad/GIST users and staff can easily determine: *uniqueness (for cooperative collection development) *locate free online sources (to reduce cost and/or catalog eBooks just-in-time) *see reviews and rankings (to add value to the request process) *see purchasing options and prices

17. GIST

21. Bibliography Nancy Lichten Alder (2007) “Direct Purchase As a Function of Interlibrary Loan: Buying Books Versus Borrowing” Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Electronic Reserve,18:1, 9-15. Megan Gaffney (2011) “Item Shipped! Purchase on Demand and ILLiad 8 Addons” 2011 ILLiad International Conference Gail Herrera & Judy Greenwood (2011) “Patron-Initiated Purchasing: Evaluating Criteria and Workflows” Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Electronic Reserve, 21:1-2, 9-24. Uta Hussong-Christian & Kerri Goergen-Doll (2010) “We're Listening: Using Patron Feedback to Assess and Enhance Purchase on Demand” Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Electronic Reserve, 20:5, 319-335. Peter Spitzform (2011) The User Knows Best www.nelib.org/Resources/Documents/NETSL/SpitzformPDAnetsl2011.pdf David C. Tyler, Joyce C. Melvin, Yang Xu, Marylou Epp & Anita M. Kreps (2011) “Effective Selectors? Interlibrary Loan Patrons as Monograph Purchasers: A Comparative Examination of Price and Circulation-Related Performance” Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Electronic Reserve, 21:1-2, 57-90 David C. Tyler (2011) “Patron-Driven Purchase on Demand Programs for Printed Books and Similar Materials” Library Philosophy and Practice http://unllib.unl.edu/LPP/tyler.htm G. Van Dyk (2011) “Interlibrary loan purchase-on-demand: A misleading literature” Library Collections, Acquisitions, and Technical Services Volume 35: 2-3, 83-89 David Zopfi-Jordan (2008) “Purchasing or Borrowing: Making Interlibrary Loan Decisions That Enhance Patron Satisfaction” Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Electronic Reserve, 18:3, 387-394.